This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [patch testsuite]: Adjust some tests for mingw targets
- From: Kai Tietz <ktietz70 at googlemail dot com>
- To: Rainer Orth <ro at cebitec dot uni-bielefeld dot de>
- Cc: GCC Patches <gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- Date: Thu, 1 Mar 2012 14:32:23 +0100
- Subject: Re: [patch testsuite]: Adjust some tests for mingw targets
- Authentication-results: mr.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of ktietz70@googlemail.com designates 10.60.26.163 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=ktietz70@googlemail.com; dkim=pass header.i=ktietz70@googlemail.com
- References: <CAEwic4Z=p_OqLqiKurgBjNhjP7x+XP00_Hdy8n47PWC1_04KLg@mail.gmail.com> <ydd8vjk31tm.fsf@manam.CeBiTec.Uni-Bielefeld.DE>
2012/3/1 Rainer Orth <ro@cebitec.uni-bielefeld.de>:
> Kai Tietz <ktietz70@googlemail.com> writes:
>
>> this test adjust some test for mingw targets.
>
> would you please fix you mailer not to break long lines? ?It makes
> reviewing harder.
>
>> Index: gcc.dg/vect/pr46126.c
>> ===================================================================
>> --- gcc.dg/vect/pr46126.c ? ? (revision 184657)
>> +++ gcc.dg/vect/pr46126.c ? ? (working copy)
>> @@ -1,5 +1,7 @@
>> ?/* { dg-do compile } */
>>
>> +__extension__ typedef __SIZE_TYPE__ size_t;
>
> I think you should use __UINTPTR_TYPE__/uintptr_t instead.
Ok, but in fact it makes for this testcase no difference.
>> Index: gcc.dg/format/dfp-scanf-1.c
>> ===================================================================
>> --- gcc.dg/format/dfp-scanf-1.c ? ? ? (revision 184657)
>> +++ gcc.dg/format/dfp-scanf-1.c ? ? ? (working copy)
>> @@ -3,7 +3,7 @@
>> ?/* { dg-do compile } */
>> ?/* { dg-require-effective-target dfp } */
>> ?/* { dg-options "-Wformat" } */
>> -/* { dg-skip-if "No scanf/printf dfp support" { *-*-mingw* } } */
>> +/* { dg-skip-if "No scanf/printf dfp support" { *-*-mingw* } { "*" }
>> { "" } } */
>
>
> What's the point of this change? ?Why are you explicitly adding the
> defaults?
I made bad expierence by omitting those defaults. Actual a different
testcase, which also omitted those defaults, were still ran instead of
being skipped.
In most places over testsuite the defaults are specified, too.
> ? ? ? ?Rainer
Regards,
Kai